You have to have ID to open a bank account. You have to have ID to buy cigarettes, beer or alcohol. You have to have ID to enter a bar or strip club. You have to have ID to purchase your prescriptions. You have to have ID to get on a plane, ship, or train for travel. You have to have ID when you see a doctor. You have to have ID when you go to an emergency room or hospital. You have to have ID to get a permanent job. You have to have ID to get an apartment. You have to have ID to set up utilities or get a mobile phone account, (unless it a burner, in some states even a burner phone requires ID at time of purchase.) You have to have a ID to purchase a gun, (In California even to purchase ammunition.) You have to have an ID to attend college. You have to have an ID to pick up your children from school (if they’re sick or have a Doctors appointment.)
Lest we forget, the country has enacted the “Real ID” act.
It should be fully in force by May 3, 2023. If you’re unfamiliar with this, you can look it up here. The minimum requirements for a Real ID are:
1) Full Legal Name; 2) Date of Birth; 3) Social Security Number; 4) Two Proofs of Address of Principal Residence; and 5) Lawful Status.
From the Real ID FAQ Section of the DHS website
I find it interesting that the authorities want to see a utility bill or something aside from just presenting my Old Driver’s license and for example, my passport. Both of which I’ve had for the past 40 years, and the address hasn’t changed in the past 30 years.
I’m honestly confused that I can’t simply show up to the DMV with my passport, have my fingerprints scanned & compared to those that were submitted 40 years ago as part of my passport application. If the fingerprints match it should be a no brainer. In fact when I got my driver’s license I was fingerprinted too. It seems that comparing all three would be proof enough that I’m really me.
According to Bernie Sanders, Stacy Abrams, and others, requiring an ID to Vote, is voter suppression? A threat to Democracy? Inherently racist? Jim Crowe???
With the implementation of Real ID nationwide and the minimum requirements of Real ID, haven’t we already laid the groundwork for requesting Voter ID? Isn’t Voter ID reasonable given the Real ID requirements?
By Sanders, Abrams, & others, logic it follows that no ID, or for that matter vaccination card, should be required at all, ever. It also begs the question; Is Real ID is pointless, as it sets the bar too high for an apparently large number of individuals in our nation?
It seems to me that, if Sanders, Abrams, et al. are so concerned about voter suppression, they’d simply make Federal funding available so that ID (Real ID or otherwise) was free to all citizens in all states.
How about simply issuing free passports to all Citizens? I’d certainly appreciate not having to pay $140 for a passport book + card. I’d also appreciate not having to pay $25 for a driver’s license.
If each citizen was issued a Passport and Passport card, then each citizen could simply use their passport card to vote. The cards have chips built in, they could be verified at the polls, much like a credit or debit card is today for transactions. And isn’t voting at its core really a transaction?
Upon verification the holder gets a printed ballot or accesses an ATM like machine that displays a ballot appropriate for their address of record. Once their vote is cast, the date and polling station id get recorded recorded on the chip and their ID cannot be used to vote again in that particular election.
That solves a bunch of problems, although it would mean that the verification and voting machines would have to be verifiably secure. The technology obviously exists otherwise no-one would have any faith in ATM banking or point of sale systems.
Imagine the chaos if everyone in a city asked to get $20 from an ATM and got their $20 bill but their account actually had $200 deducted. That just doesn’t happen, if it did, faith in banking would evaporate and everyone would demand to be paid in cash.
Such a system would ensure one vote per person. It would also negate the need for mail in ballots almost entirely. Any citizen could, on voting day, go to any polling place in their state, or for national elections, anywhere in the country and cast their vote.
In theory, a person traveling out of state could go to the county seat or registrar of voters office where-ever they were, and vote in their local elections for their home state. I’d imagine that particular functionality could be something that would come much later, since it would require some infrastructure connecting state registrars which is not available at this time.
But… you say, that all requires infrastructure we don’t have. People would still have to go to a polling place, having to show up is too hard for some people.
We actually do have most of the infrastructure already in place, which could be tasked for the purpose, and make voting accessible almost everywhere in a state.
Most banks have multiple ATMs at their branches. Those ATMs have chip readers, cameras, and touch screen displays. Surely in the interest of patriotism, banks could be prevailed upon to allow one ATM per branch, on one day a year to be programmed for voting by a duly authorized officer from the registrar of voters.
Instead of inserting your ATM card, you plug in your passport card. The ATM could even print a hard copy receipt showing your voting receipt number and perhaps your choices for various offices. I understand that after the last election people might be reluctant to use electronic means of voting. I personally have avoided electronic voting machines in my locality because they didn’t produce a printed receipt nor a copy of my voting selections. That being said, if I had both, I’d go electronic.
If you think about it, such a system could conceivably negate the question of voting fraud.
The major problem is that what I’m describing is tantamount to a National Citizen ID. Many members of congress have historically been opposed to the idea. Much as those same members of congress are opposed to voter ID laws today.
So you can see my confusion.
We have the Real ID act . But some voters apparently can’t navigate the difficulties of getting ID. (How will these people carry on day to day life? Isn’t that also exclusionary, perhaps even racist?)
Which form of ID has a higher priority? A passport or a Real ID? I’d guess a passport, given the information I had to provide when I got the passport in the first place.
We’re concerned about election integrity, But we’re allowing essentially unverifiable mail-in ballots to be counted.
Somehow asking for ID at the polls is exclusionary and racist. But to exist in 21st Century America requires ID for even the most basic things.
It’s clear that I’m missing something.
For the life of me, I can’t figure out why there’s such wailing and gnashing of teeth over simply asking for ID to Vote. As an aside, Real ID was written and passed after the 9/11 commission report, so it’s something that for once, Congress agreed was important.
